[MD] are theism and mysticism mutually exclusive notions?

[Case]

[Dan]
Umm, what part of "hearsay" is it that you fail to understand?

[Case]
Well if by hearsay you mean that we only know about Jesus through the
testimony of others. That is true. He left no writings of his own. But the
same can be said of Socrates, Augustus, Alexander the Great... In fact
nearly every thing we know can said to be hearsay. But I thought you were
using the term to imply some reason to doubt the man's existence. Or perhaps
you actually are making a comment on the nature of knowledge itself.

Case said: Their aim is to assess the historical reliability of the
documents we have relating to Jesus. The stated aim of the Jesus Seminar is
to promote religious literacy. Personally I think that in itself is a worthy
goal.

[Dan}
Well, yes, as a believer you would. It sounds like just another attempt at 
indoctrination to me, however.

[Case]
I believe that people should be educated about the beliefs their neighbors
hold dear. Christianity is the dominant religion of the west. Many of my
family members, friends and coworkers have deep religious convictions. Like
it or not Christianity is at the foundation of western civilization. I think
an educated person should be familiar with the Bible. Promoting religious
literacy includes an understanding of all of history. From shamans to monks
from mushrooms to miracles; to know about religion is to know about Mankind.
All men everywhere have practiced some form of religion. E.O. Wilson thinks
this is evidence the religion has a genetic basis. Campbell's
Transformations of Myths through time gives a broad survey of religion from
Cave Bear to Holy Grail.  

Members of the Jesus Seminar have been featured in several fine
documentaries shown on PBS. 

It seems that you by indoctrination you mean something unworthy. But perhaps
I am misunderstanding again.  

>
>
>[Case]
>This reflects ignorance about both the content and function of the Old
>Testament.

[Dan]
Right. If someone disagrees with you, they're an idiot.

[Case]
dmb had said earlier: ...the traditional religions were a positive and
crucial moral force in taming the biological impulses and most of its moral
values are aimed at that. The seven deadly sins, for example.

You responded: Old Testament bullshit.

I took your statement to imply that anything in the Old Testament is
bullshit and I suggested that this would reflect ignorance, that is
unfamiliarity. On the other hand if someone familiar with the Old Testament
suggested that it is all bullshit they would be an idiot.

Since they ideas dmb laid out are Christian and have nothing to do with the
Old Testament I assumed you were ignorant. Perhaps I was wrong.


[Dan]
When I was young I read that Ernest Hemmingway liked the way it read so much

that he had memorized the bible. I thought Hemmingway was just about the 
greatest writer who ever lived so I memorized it too. But thank you for the 
lesson anyway.

[Case]
I don't even think Hemingway was even the best of his contemporaries. 

[Dan]
I didn't say the old testament was bullshit. I said there's bullshit in the 
old testament. And there is.

[Case]
There is plenty of bullshit in the Old Testament. True enough, but I thought
you meant to imply that the Old Testament had more than it's share. Please
show me to a bullshit free zone. There is plenty in the Old Testament that
is not bullshit as well.

[Dan]
How do you know that? Know a lot of mystics, do you? Tell me too, how come 
there's no female mystics?

[Case]
I use second person pronouns interchangeability. I do use the masculine more
frequently because that is the custom of speech where I live. I acknowledge
that our language it sexist but he/she or she/he just looks stupid in text.
I will pass on that bit of political correctness.

Case said: I think there is a lot of similarity between eastern and
Neoplatonic mysticism but maybe not.

[Dan]
Yeah? And?

[Case]
dmb keeps asserting either theists can not be mystics or that there is some
philosophical reason for believing that "distinction between god and man as
the illusion to be overcome."

I am saying that Christianity has roots in Plato and Plotinus. And that it
has a strong thread of mysticism in its history. There simply is no basis
for saying that theism and mysticism are incompatible. dmb seems to want to
define the problem away which is ok, I guess, but not really. 

I will ask again: On what basis does one decide between Materialism and
Mysticism and Theism? All of them make unverifiable claims about the
fundamental nature of reality. You can not decide among them on logical
grounds. I have said before that accepting one of these systems is an act of
faith. It is akin to Don Juan advising Carlos to exercise controlled folly
and follow the path with the heart. 

[Dan]
Some navel-gazing bullshit might do you good. It appears to me that you 
might need it.

[Case]
For a warrior spite is no antidote for sarcasm.